% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Black Diamond, Inc. Message Board

edwardnessario1 24 posts  |  Last Activity: May 12, 2015 4:29 PM Member since: Dec 4, 2006
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • edwardnessario1 by edwardnessario1 May 12, 2015 4:29 PM Flag

    2015 EPS guidance raised to $1.15 vs. Consensus off $1.12
    Backlog grew to $96m from $82m in the previous quarter.

    Good luck with your short positions!


  • On 2/5/15, CTRL's management guided to 16-20% full-year 2015 revenue growth (18.0% average)

    Today (4/30/15), CTRL's management guided to 10-15% full-year 2015 revenue growth (12.5% average)

    (12.5/18.0) - 1 = -30.6%.

    CTRL is a Tech 1.0 company IMO

  • edwardnessario1 by edwardnessario1 Mar 11, 2015 10:12 AM Flag

    The only time this stock gets a bonce is when people that have no idea what's going on buy it because it screens cheaply.

  • edwardnessario1 edwardnessario1 Mar 5, 2015 7:51 AM Flag

    Right, but they shut down most of the rest of it essence, he's right.

  • edwardnessario1 by edwardnessario1 Mar 4, 2015 10:35 AM Flag

    This board has been pure entertainment for me for over 1.5 years and I'm sorry to see it go...and according to its 8-k filing yesterday, CRRS will be gone. The remaining $10m of market cap will pretty much go to zero...but I guess who cares at this point; $700m of market cap has already been lost from the highs.

    All that's left is an apology to me from Bonerbee, Pensive, Climbthemtns, CAHarry, and all the others that bad-mouthed and insulted me when I uncovered this fraud back in 2013. I'm not holding my breath...

    *the aggregate termination notices mailed in 2015 represent $720m of 2014 billngs
    *The Company is continuing to evaluate sales opportunities for the balance of the business

  • edwardnessario1 by edwardnessario1 Feb 27, 2015 10:07 AM Flag

    It looks like the last of the smart money is bailing on this one. Most of what CTRL does can be accomplished for a fraction of the price and APPL, GOOG, MSFT, et al are coming after the space with solutions that don't require cutting out drywall or permanently installing short-lived technology.

  • edwardnessario1 by edwardnessario1 Feb 23, 2015 4:10 PM Flag

    I was wondering what happens when the entire board of directors and management team quit and nobody is left to even unlock the front door in the morning. I think I got my answer...try their website, or try calling their phone number (you can get it off the cached websearch in GOOG). Sorry bonerbee...

  • Reply to

    You're All Panicking - And You're Suckers

    by pensivepoop Feb 23, 2015 2:48 PM
    edwardnessario1 edwardnessario1 Feb 23, 2015 4:05 PM Flag

    Read my former posts...I've been shouting this from the rooftops for over a year and other posters just #$%$ on me. Unbelievable.

  • Reply to

    Letting CRRS live is in Wells' best interest

    by hardboiled88 Feb 15, 2015 8:54 PM
    edwardnessario1 edwardnessario1 Feb 19, 2015 2:22 PM Flag

    CRS going away doesn't meant that the receivables collateralizing the credit line go away. If CRS goes bust, Wells will still get the net value of receivables.

    Also, what happens to a company when nobody shows up to work? I've never even contemplated that situation but literally most of the board and management team have left. Who's go the key to the front door of corporate offices? Are they the right people to drive any shareholder value? There are no underlying assets here so if the process grinds to a halt, then what?

  • Reply to


    by douthittpaul Feb 10, 2015 4:35 PM
    edwardnessario1 edwardnessario1 Feb 11, 2015 9:14 AM Flag

    Nobody said that CRS was filing for BK, it's CRS' PEO that's filing. AND, given that CRS' auditor just resigned, it's CEO and CFO both resigned, four board members resigned, CRS' internal Audit Committee wants to investigate itself but Wells wont let them use any money for the investigation, and the outgoing board members' comments that they're leaving because they can't obtain funding...need I continue? You would really put your money into this stock? Vaya con Dios my friend...

  • Reply to

    What a Disaster

    by edwardnessario1 Feb 9, 2015 11:23 AM
    edwardnessario1 edwardnessario1 Feb 9, 2015 1:10 PM Flag

    What are you talking about hardboiled? There's no analysis as to what is to be done here...or what is management thinking. Most of the revenue CRS generates is actually TSE's revenue. CRS recognizes all of TSE's revenue and then pays TSE 92% of that revenue through COGS and SG&A. TSE is the PEO so the actual employer of the temps that CRS recognizes revenue for. If TSE is BK, CRS' temps are at risk of checks bouncing, as others have pointed out in previous posts.

    This is a ridiculous sham of a never should've existed. It has NO NET LIQUIDATION VALUE. Tangible book value is negative. Negligible hard assets.

    Even the SEC saw that this was a sham of a company years ago. Before it changed its name, CRS operated as "Accountabilities." The SEC wrote them a letter, posted on EDGAR, that says: "it appears in substance Accountabilities is functioning as a placement agent on behalf of TSE. As such, IT IS UNCLEAR WHY YOU ARE NOT REPORTING REVENUES NET OF AMOUNTS PAID TO TSE TO CLEARLY REFLECT THE ECONOMIC SUBSTANCE OF THE EMPLOYEE LEASING TRANSACTIONS."

    Here is the link (read item #3)

  • edwardnessario1 by edwardnessario1 Feb 9, 2015 11:23 AM Flag

    This situation is literally a disaster. Maybe some of you on this board will take money from others trying to day trade this thing over the next [?] weeks, but in my opinion, there is a high probability that this stock is a an eventual $0. I notice Bonerbee nowhere to be seen on this board anymore. This whole thing was one HUGE red flag. Unbelievable.


  • Reply to

    CRRS Temps Checks Bounced Yesterday.

    by picker.stock Feb 6, 2015 7:40 AM
    edwardnessario1 edwardnessario1 Feb 6, 2015 3:35 PM Flag

    Did you seriously say "Warren Buffet type investors" are buying this thing? I'm fully indoctrinated into the Graham/Buffet/Klarman/et al value camp and I wouldn't touch this thing with a 10-foot pole.

    And anyway, a significant portion of CRS' sales are a result of employees leased from TSE and administered by TSE. CRS simply acts as a middle man and takes a thin cut. If TSE is BK, then those employees would ostensibly be at risk of not getting paid, because they ultimately work for TSE (TSE is the CRS PEO).

  • edwardnessario1 by edwardnessario1 Feb 4, 2015 10:12 AM Flag

    I feel terrible that this happened to unwitting investors again! AGAIN! How it it possible? It's situations like this that make me sick to my stomach. I'm genuinely sorry for all those that sustained losses here (despite all the attacks on me). I'll always be amazed that people are so willing to believe.

  • Reply to

    Kitchen Sink

    by edwardnessario1 Dec 30, 2014 4:00 PM
    edwardnessario1 edwardnessario1 Dec 31, 2014 8:50 AM Flag

    I think $60-80m of cash flow is what was expected per a writeup that was circulated among the HF community earlier this year. There was a question of whether a good portion of the cash balance was a result of a large drawdown in receivables from the lost customer...looks like it was, and business has deteriorated some during the restatement period.

    The business is far from dead, however. New management just needs to stabilize and then grow. RCM is alive and well despite what some would have you believe...Navigant, a consulting firm that was helping customers with RCM, acquired its own RCM business to bring the capability in-house given that it was referring so much business away.

    Ultimately however, 20x FCF for a business that is declining on both the top and bottom lines in an industry that is becoming highly competitive doesn't seem like a bargain.

    I do think that management is probably sandbagging here a bit...they'd be smart to. The new CEO likely wants to start 2015 with a clean slate and show what he did in the first full year on the job. Nonetheless, these results are a disappointment from what expectations likely were.

  • Reply to

    Kitchen Sink

    by edwardnessario1 Dec 30, 2014 4:00 PM
    edwardnessario1 edwardnessario1 Dec 30, 2014 5:46 PM Flag

    $35-40m, 20x fcf? Kitchen Sink! Stock plunges, Maybe I buy some.

  • edwardnessario1 by edwardnessario1 Dec 30, 2014 4:00 PM Flag

    They throw all bad news into this announcement I bet. What new CEO wants to enter their first full year with the stock at 52wk highs? Sold all my shares today...Might repurchase after announcement

  • Reply to

    Fire the CFO

    by californiaharry Nov 19, 2014 11:34 AM
    edwardnessario1 edwardnessario1 Dec 23, 2014 5:48 PM Flag

    I'm not sure why you believe you belong on this chat more than me Bonerbee. Rather than having your underpants wedge further into that narrow opening near your back pocket each time someone brings the truth why don't you please tell me what you believe this stock is worth, support that assertion with one (if we're lucky two) datapoints, and I'll spend a reasonable amount of time walking you through my logic with links, comps, references, numbers, etc. The entire board will benefit BUT...I need a baseline here from you. What's the business worth and why?

  • Reply to

    Fire the CFO

    by californiaharry Nov 19, 2014 11:34 AM
    edwardnessario1 edwardnessario1 Dec 22, 2014 11:06 PM Flag

    Young Grooving Bonerbee, I provided all the analysis and commentary you mentioned during our previous conversations. Back then I also said that if it's not a total house of cards, based on earnings, CRRS should be trading at no more than $1.15. You called me crazy, insulted me, and laughed [proverbially] because CRRS was trading at 3x that amount at the time. I saw CRRS hit $0.84 yesterday (so I win obviously).

    But my point is not to "win," Bonerbee...I could be condescending and compare mental sparring with you to sparring with my pre-adolescent children but that would only serve to RE-reinforce my point; that being right in an argument with a unsophisticated trader on a stock chat is as unimportant as being right in an argument with an angry five year old. Back to the middle and around again?

    Further, I don't know you personally and I get no pleasure as less careful investors lose money on these situations. It can be frustrating/aggravating to watch until I have to chime in (see my most recent post) but I never pretended that any of the information in that post was a "breakthrough." To slowly handhold you through what I thought should've been obvious, I said literally the exact opposite:

    "I would've thought that at some point SOMEONE on this message board would actually open a 10K or 10Q and actually LOOK at the numbers." This doesn't even approach are we clear big guy?

    Anyway, to your point about being a con-artist, read my post from the XWES chat at your convenience, where I expound on all of the positives of that company. XWES was just bought out for a significant premium to its recent levels AND that bullish, positive message from me in late March 2014.

    Net/net, I'd be mad if I were you too! This stock has lost you a TON of money...since we began discussing it, the market has gone up +20% and this stock has gone down -70%. That's 90 points of negative alpha.

    And, BTW, I'm not short CRRS...No Borrow ;P


  • Reply to

    Fire the CFO

    by californiaharry Nov 19, 2014 11:34 AM
    edwardnessario1 edwardnessario1 Dec 22, 2014 7:03 AM Flag

    I would've thought that at some point SOMEONE on this message board would actually open a 10K or 10Q and actually LOOK at the numbers. This entire situation has nothing to do with the CFO...rather, CRRS' business model is severely flawed. It pays almost all revenue in the form of COGS, SG&A, and interest to its largest shareholder, TSE. What's more, CRRS' CEO works for TSE and the two cos are located in the same building. This is round-trip revenue to TSE and CRRS/Shareholders are left with an inflated "revenue" line and virtually nothing else of value. What do I mean? In the most recently reported quarter (Sep 2014), here are CRRS' economics:

    Revenue: $260m
    Cost of revenue paid to TSE: $227m
    SG&A paid to TSE: $13m
    Interest paid to TSE: $1m
    Total paid to TSE: $242m
    % of revenue paid to TSE: 93%

    AND, this is before CRRS pays its own execs and factoring interest totaling another $11m. So what's left for shareholders? Net income is $2m on revenue of $260m, or 0.7%. Annualize this $2m ($2 * 4 = $8) and at a $5 stock price as referenced by bigideaportugal, CRRS would be trading for 100x earnings. How do I get there?

    Shares: 162m
    Price: $5
    Market Cap = $810m
    Net income = $8m
    Price/Earnings = 100x

    As it is, CRRS trades for 18x earnings. Why should it trade for ANY more? If CRRS' margins compressed by just half a percent, over 70% of its net income would be wiped out. This is clearly a joke with so many red and yellow flags that only the very LEAST sophisticated market participants would be fooled by. IMHO

9.46+0.36(+3.96%)Aug 4 4:00 PMEDT